Declaring My Big, Red "C"

The title for this post refers to my response to Craig Newmark when I interjected myself into a conversation he and Tim O'Reilly were having on Twitter about needing transparency of lobbyists:

@craignewmark Tweeted that same story about lobbyists a half hour ago. Trying to figure out what to do about it. Registered Lobbyist badge?

@craignewmark @timoreilly yup, lobbyist story circulating well, which is good. I like idea that professional communicators should be marked.

Being a "professional communicator" myself, although not a lobbyist, this stream piqued my interest. The tweets that started this concerned a Washington Post story circulating on Facebook and Twitter about PR professionals and other "tech industry lobbyists" using social media to further the interests of the organizations they represent. According to the Post, the issue is that many of these "influence peddlers" are not declaring

Did Arizona "Ban Ethnic Studies"?

Controversial topics always bring out the rhetorical devices. Arizona House Bill 2281--Arizona's latest in a series of controversial actions related to immigration, race, and culture--has enjoyed more than its fair share of rhetorical spin. Because cultural and ethnic studies are a large part of my own research and teaching agendas, I decided to look more closely at what the bill actually says rather than the rhetorical spin.

The primary attack on the bill is evident in various forms of the oft-repeated headline:

Arizona bans "ethnic studies"

This is a fascinating rhetorical spin